You are here

Police: Bicyclist tries to get ahead of SUV and make a turn, gets hit

The Daily Free Press reports police say a BU student was taken to St. Elizabeth with neck, back and knee injuries yesterday after she tried but failed to beat an SUV through a left turn on Comm. Ave. near Kenmore Square.

When a cyclist does something Masshole stupid, they risk their own life.

When a motorist does something Masshole stupid, dangerous, or angry with a massive overpowered vehicle and kills somebody, it not only doesn't kill them but they are rarely held fully accountable for their behavior. Masshole driving is a divine right of kings or "unavoidable" or they just "made a little mistake" or "just looked away for a moment" or "didn't see something they should have looked for" or "it isn't my fault", etc.

Really? "rarely held fully accountable for their behavior." First, how in heaven's name do you know this?, second, the motorist may not even BE accountable for said accident so he/she would not be HELD accountable, and third, those that ARE accountable are HELD accountable (i.e. the drunk driver who hit and killed the 63YO cyclist last week. He will be held accountable).

The cyclist in this accident made a grave error that, fortunately, did not kill her but maybe wisened her up a bit. She could just as easily say, "I made a little mistake", "I just looked away for a moment", "I did not see the SUV" or "it was not my fault."

Really? "rarely held fully accountable for their behavior." First, how in heaven's name do you know this?

Yes, my evidence is purely anecdotal, but I have heard far too many cases where a rider simply riding along on the side of the road gets whacked, the driver is caught, and the driver is never charged. Cases like that are the norm unfortunately. The one case you pointed out is an exception.

I'm not saying the driver is always at fault, nor am I saying that all cyclists are saints. Cyclists should be ticketed like anybody else for misbehaving on the road. All I'm saying is drivers are rarely charged for hitting cyclists.

As for this case, too little is known, but the initial evidence doesn't look too good for the cyclist. Still, I hope the rider is OK.

a cyclist gets a ticket, they pay a one-time fine and are not subject to possible surchages on their insurance for six years. So there's much less of a financial incentive for them to not break the law.

How do we fix this basic inequity? For starters, when an adult cyclist that is also a licensed driver is issued a moving violation whlie riding their bike, that violation should go on thier driving record.

Also, when it is determined that a cyclist is indeed at fault in a crash, that should be prominetly indicated in any reports, reporting, etc. instead of the current "the driver wasn't found at fault" or similar statements we see so often.

Indeed. I've had just as many close calls with bikers breaking traffic laws as I've had with motor vehicles. The bikers can be even worse than the cars at times, because they sometimes ride on the sidewalk. It's bad enough I have to worry about getting nailed by a biker sailing through a red light while I'm in a crosswalk (my latest near miss in a crosswalk happened yesterday morning,) I shouldn't have to worry about getting nailed while I'm still on the freaking sidewalk.

That graph gives us no useful information. We can infer that both axes are percentile-scaled because of the normalization on the inital value of 100. But without the same data for motor vehicle use and MV/ped injury rates, and for the absolute number of ped injuries, we can make no supportable conclusions about relative threat of injury.

Also, as anon pointed out... Boston ≠ NYC.

Also, JeanneM was relating her personal experience, not making a claim of overall threat.

(Of course if I had to choose, I would rather get hit by a bike than a car (doy!) - but I see hits/near hits involving cyclists often enough to understand some pedestrian's unease around them).

When was the last time a non-jaywalking pedestrian was seriously injured by a cyclist.

And when was the last time a pedestrian in a crosswalk was killed by a motor vehicle.

Matter of scale, not your theory or opinion sweetheart. Go look at the old threads to find the data on the vanishing percentage of injury accidents to pedestrians caused by cyclists versus the automobile-generated carnage.

A girl was waiting for the cross light on the curb cut at the CVS by BU Central. A bicyclist riding too close to the curb and trying to beat the light clipped the pedestrian's large purse with the edge of her handlebars. Cyclist fell like a six year old.

I ride through this intersection daily and while I spend most of the time looking at the lights for my green signal to move on, I'm having a lot of trouble remembering the bike lane being directly along the curb or there being any curb extensions that would put pedestrians waiting for the signal right next to the bike lane. In fact thats not true at all, there is a line of car parking spaces that lead right up to the intersection. So for this girl to have been clipped by the cyclist as you said, it would mean that pedestrian was standing in the road, did not have the signal to cross yet and was in the path of the cyclist who may have been rushing to beat the light (you didn't say they were running a red light) meaning they had the right of way.

Confused BU Central CVS with the one after the BU Bridge, forgot there are two CVS locations.

In any case, the location at BU central is bike lane along the curb and that is daily game of Comm Ave Lemmings when the students are around. Apparently there are a lot of BU undergrads whose parents didn't teach them to wait on the curb and look left when crossing the street, as evidenced by all the cross walks at BU that say "Look left for bicycles." Life skills. I base this solely on almost cleaning out a few of the BU's brightest when I have the right of way and crowd decides to form and spill over into the street.

Not that I'm defending the driver of the SUV that hit the cyclist who was trying to outsmart him for the left turn, but this:

Sounds like a case of an overzealous biker AND pedestrian that both were not taking safety into consideration.

is something that happens more frequently than a lot of people care to believe. A cyclist is also subject to the rules of the road, because a bicycle is also a vehicle, and should also be held accountable when s/he violates any of those laws.

I agree that both cyclists and motorists behave like assholes in this town, but I would hardly call a skinned knee a "serious injury." Even a broken arm is nothing compared to the damage when a ped or cyclist is hit by a car.

She spilled her coffee and scraped her knee and you call that "seriously injured"?

You do realize that when I was bounced off the hood of a car and taken to the ER by ambulance bleeding from multiple points on my body and was in a cast for 6 weeks, Boston Police classified that as "minor injuries", right?

I was waiting for the WALK light outside of Haymarket to cross Surface Road. The light went on, I stepped into the cross walk and a cyclist blew through the red light (past several stopped cars, I might add) and ran right into me. I fell, skinned my knee and palm, and that afternoon I lost my big toenail from where he ran right over my foot. The asshole wobbled a little on his bike, recovered, and rode away before I could get the attention of the T cop roaming the other side of the station.

I do find judgmental suburban drivers of massive overpowered vehicles to be the most dangerous when it comes to people who drive in cities. They're accustomed to their comfortable wide suburban roads, driveways, slower pace lifestyle, less traffic and less cyclists and pedestrians on the road, crossing the road, etc. Oh wait...!

"In approaching or passing a person on a bicycle the operator of a motor vehicle shall slow down and pass at a safe distance and at a reasonable and proper speed."

If the driver had rammed into the back of a car, he would have been cited for following too closely. He rams a cyclist and everyone, including Adam, starts tapdancing on her hospital bed and jeering at her.

WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT SHE WAS DOING OR TRYING TO DO BECAUSE NOBODY, INCLUDING THE POLICE, BOTHERED TO INTERVIEW HER.

We have no idea about what she was trying to do? True. You are taking a pretty big defensive stand considering you have no idea what was going on either. For all you know she could have been zipping by him and cut him off.

who somehow want to make it seem like every day was a Sunday drive down Happiness Lane until the big bad cyclists started taking to the roadways.

Please, it's like when people b*tch about Critical Mass. My usual response is "What about the other 27+ days and 22 hours there isn't Critical Mass and the traffic still sucks?" Do you blame Critical Mass for 10-mile backups on I-495 because some a$$hat cut off a truck, causing it to rollover and spill its goods?

Nothing gives me more satisfaction than to make people's heads explode when they talk about traffic.
"Hey, there was a lot of traffic on my commute this morning!"
-"Um, because you were sitting in it!"

2) Of those, most of them are fat asses who couldn't peddle a bike around their cul-de-sac, much less navigate Summer Street during rush hour on a fixie.

3) When these suburban fattys do their annual/semi-annual drive into the city to visit Fanuel Hall/North End/Museum of Science, bikers are just the proverbial icing-on-the-cake of the auto-induced emasculation they are served on Boston's streets.

Did I say you people are suburban fat asses? No, I said I bet you are a suburban fat ass.

As far as my untested hypothesis regarding the body composition of those who anonymously hate bike riders in Boston; residents of this is city are socially progressive (DUH) and very fit (Boston ranked third fittest in the US last year http://americanfitnessindex.org/docs/reports/2012_...)

Given those two facts, as well my own anecdotal experience as a long time resident, the consensus amongst residents is more then likely pro-bike, and if not, unlikely to make such vitriolic opposition. So who posts these comments? People who do not live in the city, do not ride and/or both.

Analogy: based on Boston.com's comments section, you'd think Menino is minutes away from being lynched by an angry mob of Boston.com readers. Yet he is relected over again. Why? People who don't live in the city love to come on these sites and bitch.

"as a long time resident, the consensus amongst residents is more then likely pro-bike". Well as a LIFE LONG RESIDENT if feel the consensus is purely the opposite. Maybe among your hipster friends, but not a true statement if referring to "All" residents.

*white residents of this city with money, you mean. But yeah, all those dark skinned people in Mattapan, Roxbury, East Boston etc don't *really* matter. You guys just like having them around so you can be progressive.

...either way, take a ride down Blue Hill Ave at any time of day and you will see people of all skin colors riding bikes (or any part of that city for that matter, you're the one that made it about certain hoods!).

with low-income urban bike riders, who are usually, but not always, minorities is not a real comparison. Those people use bicycles because they cannot afford cars and public transportation in those parts of Boston is quite crap, while the urban white bike rider rides for health reasons or progressive ideology. Not really comprable.

The probably with defeating Menino is similar to defeating Obama - nobody electable to run against them. Menino has too much political power for an opponent to succeed against him.

The pro-bike forces are more vocal and on-line than the silent majority. Try actually putting non-binding ballot questions to voters asking them if they want to lose 1/2 the parking on Mass Ave or travel lanes on bridges, or lose travel lanes on various streets, or tear down an overpass. The cost is virtually nothing to add these questions to ballots, with answers given by ward/precinct. Nobody does that because they know the results would be against them.

I wanted to make clearer the difference between: "we have a great mayor" and "other candidates all suck more". I like Obama more than Menino and the Republican candidates all just really sucked. I voted for Dr. Ron Paul in the primary, but he's too socially progressive/ pro-freedom, and unelectable to win Republican nomination or even an invite to the convention.

I've lived in the city for 16 years, I am definitely an ass but I'm not fat. And yes, I am judging people: people who do not live in the city, but love to bitch about it. I love this city, I think the mayor does a great job and great things are happening. On Facebook I routinely see comments from people that don't live anywhere near the city (and never have) bitching about "Mumbles", parking, the Greenway, all types of isht.

Do I go online and bitch about your PTA meetings? Do I complain about your committee to plant a tree on the village green?

Who ride bikes, do NOT run red lights and CONSTANTLY have to deal with pedestrians who don't get the whole "red hand means DO NOT WALK" and then whine about bikes "almost running them down" when they jaywalk like drunk pigeons.

and, as I've said before, I'm also scrupulous follower of traffic laws when driving and cycling and commuting part-time by each method. (Sorry for the late entry, merlinmurph).

Yep, we do exist - and can you spot us around town by the way we stand on your right side whilst you're waiting at a red light.

As much as I'd be like to be able to say I comply with the law so that I can assume a "holier than thou" status, that's not the reason. The reason that I do it is because the safest way to operate a bicycle in an urban and suburban environment is to operate it as if operating a car. The car-driving mindset is the one that the majority of road users operate in, and most users are just not good at operating outside of that mindset. I make it so they don't have to, and by doing so, I maximize my own safety.

I just cooked up this little ditty that puts it in a nutshell:

I ride as I drive and that's how I stay alive.

(Of course, since so many people drive like imbeciles, this mantra won't help them one little bit. Sigh.)

What world do you live in where most bike riders wait for red lights? I'm sorry, but that just doesn't happen. 90% of them EASY blow the red lights without a second thought. Yet here you are, always insisting that WE FOLLOW TEH RULEZ!!!1!! People like you are the number one reason I am no longer a liberal.

I sincerely doubt the number is even close to 90% of cyclists blowing lights. And let me tell you…I'm teaching my partner to drive right now, and spend most of time pointing out what other motorists are doing WRONG. I can't get a mile from my house without seeing someone in a car doing something stupid behind the wheel. Can my anecdote cancel out your anecdote?

where the average pedestrian crosses only at crosswalks and waits for the Walk signal. Spare me the bleeding-heart bull-$hit. Dumba$$ pedestrians are part of the reason there are Stop signs along the E-Line and B-Line for the trolleys--because it takes extra special talent to get hit by something slow-moving and confined to a track, and yet it happens every year by some over-zealous pedestrian.

In my workday bike commute along Mass. Ave. I actually use jaywalking pedestrians as my sign that it's all right to proceed through an intersection.

I have a very short walk to work, and on the way I traverse about three intersections in which there's a "Don't walk" displayed at the wrong times. For example, if you have a one-way street entering an intersection, and the traffic on that street has a red light and there's a "no turn on red" sign, then there is absolutely no reason to display a "Don't walk", and yet I see that pattern all over the place. No wonder pedestrians get in the habit of ignoring the "don't walk" signs.

Yesterday, witnessed a Masshole on a bike blow through the red light, while simultaneously almost getting hit by a car taking a legal right turn on green and nearly wiping out a pedestrian well into the crosswalk. Smarten up!

I've been cycling since I was 4. I've been cycling on Boston streets since I was 7. You must confuse me with the hipsters on their '80s fixies. I guarantee you won't catch me during rush hour on Huntington Ave or Mass. Ave--and that's stopping at every red light. Heck, Beacon Street, Commonwealth Avenue, Brookline Ave, Centre Street, Columbus Ave . . .

YOU sit at that light (as the law requires) instead of blowing through it. Because it's inconvenient for you to do so?

Well, nobody forced you to ride a bike on City streets, did they? And if you can't ride your bike in a manner that you can obey traffic laws, then perhaps you shouldn't be on the road in the first place instead of making excuses for your behavior.

These "justifications" the cycling lobby keep citing for breaking the law (I'm cold, I'm tired, I'm scared) are one of the key reasons the anomosity towards cyclists from many others is growing.

And, in my own experiences (30+ years of driving and walking - used to cycle, but gave that up over 20 years ago), I would say that for every one cyclist I've seen wait for a red light to change, I've seen three or four blow through that same light. So don't try to convince me that drivers are far worse (and yes, I've seen my share of drivers blowing red lights as well - but not nearly at a 3:1 ratio).

Just how does the fact that I chose to stop cycling over twenty years ago (due to several circumstances, it just wasn't practical for me to do so anymore) bears any relationship to my comments about how many cyclists these days find flimsy excuses (more traffic, more distractions, it's too inconvenient for me to wait at a light) to justify disregarding traffic laws.

And the fact I chose to stop cycling has nothing to do with the alleged poor condition of the Mass. Ave bike lanes or my observations that, on average, only one out of four cyclists I see at the Downtown Boston intersections I frequent on a daily basis actually wait for a red light to change.

Just how does the fact that I chose to stop cycling over twenty years ago (due to several circumstances, it just wasn't practical for me to do so anymore) bears any relationship to my comments about how many cyclists these days find flimsy excuses (more traffic, more distractions, it's too inconvenient for me to wait at a light) to justify disregarding traffic laws.

And the fact I chose to stop cycling has nothing to do with the alleged poor condition of the Mass. Ave bike lanes or my observations that, on average, only one out of four cyclists I see at the Downtown Boston intersections I frequent on a daily basis actually wait for a red light to change.

I think what you will find is that vehicle traffic counts today might be similar. Its just that driving lane removals, right on red removals, road narrowing, corner tightening, and other congestion producers are responsible for reduced mobility and longer travel times.

Automobiles are larger due to government regulations for impact protection and having big crumple zones. Honda Civics today are huge and obese compared to 20 or 40 years ago, and weighed less than a Smart having only 2 seats, does today.

My skinny ass walks, thank you very much. Now if you would please get your bike off the sidewalk and into that bike lane, all of us walkers would be most appreciative. Pro tip: city sidewalks are narrow and crowded and not appropriate for cyclists who selfishly think it amusing to speedily zigzag amongst those on foot and those in wheelchairs. To all the courteous cyclists I see on a daily basis, thank you for restoring my faith in urban cycling!

1)At the Southbound entrance, the bike lane is barely 2-3 feet wide. The lane opens up to ~3-4 feet.

2)Traffic is passing you at 30-40MPH within a foot or two, which is terrifying to all but the most experienced cyclists. Try it some time, Mr. Hero.

3)The lanes are never swept, and so they're full of months worth of broken glass and metal which can slice your tire open (and if that happens to your front wheel, you can lose control...reminder: the bike lane is barely 3-4 feet wide), or sand which is slippery.

4)The lanes, particularly at the ends of the bridge, have waves/humps/ridges in the pavement smack in the middle of the bike lane that are several inches high. Especially at night, if you hit one of them wrong, they can cause you to crash. If those ridges were in the road people would scream blue-bloody murder to have them repaired, but because they're in the bike lane, they've been there for years and the state/Cambridge/Boston don't give a shit.

Complain to whoever is supposed to be in charge of the bridge. The sidewalk is for PEDESTRIANS and I'm sick of dealing with it! If bike riders are going to be assholes, then I am too! Walk your damn bike across the bridge if you're too scared to ride. And I don't ride a bike, and am not claiming that I do, so take your "mr hero" comment and put it where the sun don't shine.

I ride a mountain bike for this reason. People ask me why I ride a mountain bike on the road and I tell them I can ride through all seasons and glass isn't tough enough to shred my tires. I also think you get a better work out due to the added weight.

But I do understand your frustration, but I've been in Boston my whole life and I promise those roads are never going to get better. They'll pave it and a couple months later it will be a crater again. Riding on the sidewalk is not a solution. If it is that bad don't ride on that road at night or walk your bike across the bridge.

Either don't ride or use equipment suitable for conditions! Use mountain bike durable tires and wheels rather than complain about conditions you can't control. Might as well complain about rain, snow, wind, hot, and cold weather also.

Don't be daft. Car crash debris, and potholes are caused by motor vehicles - they're man-made conditions, and thus controllable by man. It is also someone's job to periodically clean and patch roads so requesting they do their job in a more thorough and efficient manner is quite reasonable. Besides the safety issues, all that trash in the road is hardly aesthetic either.

You would complain to no end if your suburban street was not plowed so you could drive in the winter. So your snow example is particularly inane.

Mountain bikes and tires and wheels are not suitable for urban use because they are inefficient and far too heavy. An only moderate quality bike for road use should still weigh less than a small cat. You wouldn't use spiked, knobby rally tires on tarmac with your car - why should a bike? The roads are designed to be smooth and clean and should be maintained that way. Nor are mountain bike tires impervious to punctures and slashes from debris. Even car tires can only take so much abuse - a piece of debris as short as a centimeter can puncture car tires if lodged in the rubber in the right angle.

in their infinite wisdom, when the Legislature passed the law mandating bike lanes and other "necessary" amenities, the capitulated to MassRides and others by not making it a legal requirement for cyclists to actually stay within said bike lanes where they're provided.

for motor vehicles are proposed (like adding a lane on an Interstate or even installing traffic signals at an intersection), guess what - they have to be reviewed on a case by case basis to verify that the improvements are justified and supported by actual facts. Usually that's done on the basis of parameters such as traffic volumes and average delays.

Common sense states that the cycling lobby should be held to similar standards. Instead, the cycling lobby forced a law through the Legislature that requires these facilities be provided, even if there's no legitimate justification for them.
And when the cyclists get their special "me only" facilites, they aren't even legally required to use them. To me. these attitutes meet the textbook defintion of entitlement.

Perhaps I'm not the one here that needs to put on "big boy" pants in regards to this issue.

This raises an interesting point - my view of the world is that excepting the purely residential sections of Boston, nearly all of the city is a business district, in which cycling on the sidewalks is prohibited. Has the city demarcated the business district boundaries where cycling on a sidewalk is prohibited? Does state law provide additional guidance?

It sounds like she made a bad mistake. I hope she'll recover to get back on a bike --- and be more careful.

There is no left turn at that intersection for good reason. On a bike, even more so (the tracks). It would have been much wiser to stop at the corner, push the pedestrian button, and cross to Silber in the crosswalk. That's what I always do.

I was biking on Essex Street near Chinatown. I was in the right lane. I was going with the speed of traffic, though there wasn't very much of. I had only just turned on from Boylston, and we were nowhere near the 90/93 split. A white Cadillac SUV came speeding up on the left lane and immediately tried to merge into my lane. I had to quickly squeeze my way between the SUV and a chain-link fence where there was construction being done and pull over in a crosswalk.

I was terrified. My heart was beating so fast it felt like it was going to burst out of my chest. I gathered myself and managed to catch up to him at the next light. Still shaking, I knocked on his window and said, "Good morning! You almost hit me. Please be observant when you are driving."

His response? "I'm so, so sorry! Honestly, I didn't even look. I just saw a car. I'm sorry."

I'm not an intense cyclist. This is my first time biking all the way to work (from Allston to Fort Point). I am cautious. I only sneak through red lights when there is no possibly turning traffic (ie. just a crosswalk). I wear my helmet. And I yield to vehicles. But it doesn't matter. It's not even that drivers are "assholes." They just don't KNOW. They are trained to look for other 4-wheeled vehicles and pedestrians; not bicycles.

The only red light I'm not terrified to go through is at that same intersection as the accident -- Commonwealth @ Silber. When traveling inbound, the road to the right (Blandford Mall) is blocked off to vehicles, which means there is no traffic crossing Commonwealth and the bike lane. And I don't just through the red. I stop. I wait. I look. I realize there are no vehicles (because there can't be) and no pedestrians, and inch through.

It just puts you in the category of cyclists that don't believe the rules of the road apply to them.

I bike commute to work everyday through this intersection and everyday day I see clowns blow that red light and many others along my route. You can paint it any way you like but ignoring the red and even treating it like a stop sign is a violation of the law and creates unsafe driving conditions for cars/bikes/pedestrians alike. We do not have Idaho Stop laws here in Massachusetts, so stop acting like it.

as directed by the doorman at the hotel. In fact there's a sign in sheet at the front door that specifically directs you to park in front of the hotel at that space it's available as long as you do not leave the vehicle. When the guest comes out, you are then allowed into the small driveway to pick up.

So the hotel doorman is able to grant special privilege to park illegally? That kind of runs against the language set out by Chapter 90: Section 20A.5 of the Mass General Law. But thats cool, don't take personal responsibility for violating the law by parking with 10 feet of a fire hydrant, blame someone else or just convince yourself that its not illegal when you do it.

And 4 bucks a gallon is tough, no doubt about that. Just thank your lucky stars you aren't paying the true cost that Canadian and EU drivers see. It averages around $8-10/gallon.

Hotel doormen are pretty much free to do what they want in this city as long as BTD personnel still get to eat in hotel cafeterias for free or maybe you've never noticed the mess at the Ritz on Avery or the messes at the Intercontinental or the Harbor Hotel.

You keep quoting those MGL's though, I'll keep living in the real world.

At first, I was confused about what happened here and why no one seemed to be upset that the driver hadn't yielded to a bike in front of him/her who going to take a left. After all, the article made clear that the driver saw the bicyclist, but couldn't stop in time.

I was wondering that until I looked at street view and saw that there are at least three signs that clearly say that you may not take a left from eastbound Comm. Ave. onto Silber Way. If you don't play by the rules, you should expect bad things to happen.

I'd like to humbly suggest that our omnipotent UHub master adjust the headline to read "Bicyclist tries to take an ILLEGAL left, cuts in front of SUV, and pays the price for her foolishness" or some such.

Yet another example of why when I ride my bike, I do so as if I was driving a car (i.e., I follow all applicable traffic laws). It's the best way to increase my chances of survival.

Exactly, what I figure is that she was in the bike lane and wanted to make the left over to Blandford's new walking mall or the bike racks in front of the science building or something. It's an illegal left, so she should have walked it across the crosswalk.

However, if she was making that left, she didn't overtake a car in the left lane that had a green signal on a bike...so she had to come from in front of him and start to come over into his lane. My guess is he wasn't paying attention to what she was doing because he was "just going to pass her" and in the process ended up running her over as she tried to cut across without looking over her shoulder for someone like him to be cruising up along side her all of a sudden. He even mentions that he didn't notice her look over her shoulder. So, he knew damn well she was there, but didn't drive defensively at all with her there.

So, I think they both have some blame here. He wasn't driving defensively (and probably too fast for Comm Ave through there, since pedestrians will just step off into the crosswalks ALL THE TIME and he couldn't stop for a bike turning in front of him). She was attempting to make an illegal left and doesn't seem to have looked first to see if someone was cruising in the left lane.

First off, we're relying solely on the account of the driver. Who couldn't POSSIBLY have any motive for portraying things such that he was a perfect little angel, minding his own business when that EVIL DUMB GIRL just cut right in front of him!

"If you don't play by the rules, you should expect bad things to happen."

The no-left signs are there to keep you from getting hit by the trolley.

I'm not too sure why you think I was trying to enforce traffic laws, but I'm also not too sure why you took a long walk off of a short logical pier by insisting that the at least 3 no left turn signs are to "keep you from getting hit by the trolley".

The no left turn signs mean that vehicles, including bicycles, traveling on the way may not take a left at that location. The reason why the city has determined that vehicles may not go left there is of absolutely no moment. The signs are duly posted, and all operators are legally bound to comply with them.

Accordingly, if it can be shown that the person on the bicycle was trying to take a left across that intersection (which appears to be the case) she was negligent per se. That does not necessarily mean that the motorist was not negligent in some regard, but I can tell you from experience that the motorist will prevail if this were to go to court on these facts (which did not include any mention of the driver speeding, etc.).

The only lawful way to cross from Comm. Ave. eastbound to the westbound side at that location or to go from the eastbound side to Silber Way is to walk across the crosswalk.

By the way, I am a cyclist and part-time bike commuter, so check the bias argument at the door. Thanks.

I grew up in BY and Boston riding my bike everywhere, including commuting to work.

That said, EVERY DAY I'm out and about I see bike riders doing sh*t they shouldn't be doing, not all, but many. One thing that really gets under my skin is riding the wrong way on a street, something I never did and still don't do. Another classic faux pas is running lights.

I also of course see and experience drivers acting INSANE and DISCONNECTED with their surroundings.

Bike riders:

PLEASE remember, all the good intentioned laws in the world can be passed, but a bike is still NO MATCH for an automobile, not even 2 door sub-compact. BE CAREFUL AND ALWAYS ON GUARD. EXPECT THE WORSE BEHAVIOR. BE PLEASANTLY SURPRISED WHEN IT DOESN'T HAPPEN.

I am amazed how often I will being going along and have someone make a right turn from the left lane. I've wondered more then once if this is just something that teach in school. Turn when you are ready - f*** if the road is clear. While I see dumb moves by bicyclist all the time, the turn from
the wrong lane move is a classic I see in motor vehicle drivers that must be partially developed in response to crazy roads.

The cyclist was walking his bike because his girlfriend was walking with (behind) him. It would be rude for him to ride away and leave her. She wasn't hit and testified. Even an out of state cop was driving behind and witnessed the accident. I guess it helps to use a lawyer that also defends mobsters.

Yes, I read the article. Saying "Killed a 16 year old cyclist" (your words) implies that someone riding their bike was killed. That's not the case and calling him a cyclist in the context of the accident is misleading. The fact that he was walking his bike is irrelevant.
But really, just keep making stuff up.

I've seen this video posted all over the place.
The latest news is that the driver has been charged with a few violations. Most importantly, he's on their radar and the guy now knows he can be caught being a dick.

Let's see! Most days I really don't pay attention to bike riders, as they rarely annoy me personally and when they do I tend to let it slide, because I truly feel you have to be nuts to ride a bike in this town.

So today I decided that since I was around Boston and Cambridge all day today for work on a super busy day, I'd start paying attention to the bike riders.

There was the guy in the bike with the milk crate tied to the back who waited for the first car to drive from Bromfield onto Tremont before he just darted across the street in front of the second car, forcing the driver of the car to slam on his brakes to avoid hitting him.

Then traveling down Kneeland Street in a little bit of traffic, there was the kid who nailed a woman crossing the street legally. He was doing the usual "I have this bike, so I'll weave in and out of traffic because I can" thing. At least he stopped and apologized.

My favorite was the one I observed around 5PM when I was sitting in front of 220 Mass Ave in Cambridge. A woman who appeared to be in her early thirties was riding her bike in the designated bike lane. No safety gear whatsoever.

What made her unique? She was texting with one hand, steering with the other and dangling a clove cigarette out of her mouth. Fascinating.

Now I must say that I was at the Mass Ave location for about an hour and the overwhelming majority of the riders in the bike lane were in their safety gear and operating in a safe and courteous manner. However, based on the few morons I saw today, I would be less than candid if I didn't admit to thinking that the next poor soul who loses their life on a bike wasn't one of them

up

Voting is closed. 0

Location

Javascript is required to view this map.

Support Universal Hub

Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.